Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX, which claims 15 of the 17 recorded benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core i5-14490F secures only 2 wins, and one of those is a statistical tie. The average benchmark score gap is substantial: the Ultra 7 255HX records 62738 points versus 38149 for the i5-14490F, a difference that places the two processors 7 percentile points apart in the global database (93rd versus 86th percentile).

The largest single margin appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 7 255HX scores 400 against 122 for the i5-14490F, a 69.5% advantage. Floating point math shows a similar disparity: 160624 versus 66558, a 58.6% lead. Data encryption also heavily favors the newer part, with 39499 points compared to 18225, a 53.9% gap. Cinebench R15 multicore follows closely, with the Ultra 7 255HX scoring 4916 versus 2318, a 52.8% margin.

The Ultra 7 255HX also dominates in extended instructions, scoring 41247 against 21731, a 47.3% lead. Random string sorting shows 62591 versus 35608, a 43.1% gap. Cinebench R20 multicore and singlecore both show 43.8% leads for the Ultra 7 255HX, with scores of 17187 versus 9660 and 2426 versus 1363 respectively. PassMark multithread delivers 48234 versus 28662, a 40.6% advantage. Data compression shows 515143 versus 340026, a 34% lead. Integer math is closer but still favors the Ultra 7 255HX: 127126 versus 87844, a 30.9% margin. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 32612 versus 23000, a 29.5% lead. Physics testing shows 2926 versus 2093, a 28.5% advantage.

The one clear win for the i5-14490F comes in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where it scores 3247 against 2163 for the Ultra 7 255HX, a 50.1% margin. The other i5-14490F win is scored as a tie in Cinebench R15 singlecore, where both processors record exactly 327 points. The PassMark single thread test favors the Ultra 7 255HX by 15.1%, with 4562 points versus 3873. This mixed picture suggests the i5-14490F retains a specific advantage in certain lightly threaded workloads, while the Ultra 7 255HX dominates across nearly every multi-threaded and throughput-oriented test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The i5-14490F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. The Ultra 7 255HX is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, using Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-HX codename. The production process differs sharply: the i5-14490F uses a 10 nm node fabricated by Intel, while the Ultra 7 255HX uses a 3 nm node fabricated by TSMC.

Core counts reveal a major structural divergence. The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with some cores supporting two threads each. The Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning every core operates with a single thread. The Ultra 7 255HX packs 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the i5-14490F uses a 215 mm² die with no transistor count recorded in the database. Cache hierarchies also differ: the i5-14490F provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 255HX offers 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, with 30 MB of shared L3.

Memory support splits the two as well. The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 7 255HX supports only DDR5 but records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The i5-14490F offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, whereas the Ultra 7 255HX provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics also separate them: the i5-14490F has no integrated GPU, while the Ultra 7 255HX includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The market segments differ, with the i5-14490F classified as a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra 7 255HX as a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114. The i5-14490F has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 7 255HX has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-14490F lists a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Ultra 7 255HX lists 2.40 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost. TDP ratings show 65 watts for the i5-14490F and 55 watts for the Ultra 7 255HX. Neither processor supports ECC memory. Release dates place the i5-14490F in late 2023 and the Ultra 7 255HX in early 2025.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates a clear workload split. The Ultra 7 255HX wins every throughput-oriented test in the comparison. This includes all Cinebench multicore tests, all PassMark math tests (integer, floating point, prime numbers), data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. The 20-core, 30 MB L3 configuration appears to drive these results, along with the higher 5.20 GHz boost clock and the 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth.

The i5-14490F wins in Cinebench R23 singlecore by a wide 50.1% margin, scoring 3247 versus 2163. This suggests that for certain single-threaded rendering workloads, the older architecture retains a distinct advantage. The tie in Cinebench R15 singlecore at 327 points for both processors further indicates that single-core performance parity exists in some legacy tests. The PassMark single thread test, however, goes to the Ultra 7 255HX with 4562 versus 3873, a 15.1% lead. The i5-14490F also has a lower base clock (2.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz), which may contribute to its edge in specific lightly threaded scenarios where sustained frequency matters more than core count.

For users processing large datasets, encryption, compression, or physics simulations, the Ultra 7 255HX delivers between 28.5% and 69.5% higher scores across the relevant benchmarks. For workloads that rely on a single thread with high clock speed, such as certain legacy renderers or specific simulation steps, the i5-14490F shows a measurable advantage in Cinebench R23. The i5-14490F also supports DDR4 memory, which may matter for platform compatibility, though the Ultra 7 255HX records a higher memory bandwidth figure.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX records an average benchmark score of 62738, compared to 38149 for the Intel Core i5-14490F. The Ultra 7 255HX also sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-14490F sits at the 86th percentile.

Q: Is there any test where the i5-14490F beats the Ultra 7 255HX by a large margin?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the i5-14490F scores 3247 against 2163 for the Ultra 7 255HX, a 50.1% lead. The two processors tie in Cinebench R15 singlecore at 327 points each.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What are the process nodes and foundries for these two chips?

A: The i5-14490F uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Ultra 7 255HX uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Ultra 7 255HX supports only DDR5, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics. The Ultra 7 255HX includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification category recorded in the database.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-14490F | Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX |

|---|---|---|

| Series | Core 14th Gen | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 10 | 20 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Arrow Lake-HX |

| Generation | Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-HX) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB shared | 30 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SRN35 | SRVFG |

| Release Date | 2023-12-31 | 2025-01-12 |

The i5-14490F holds advantages in base clock (2.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and TDP is higher at 65 W versus 55 W, but the Ultra 7 255HX leads in boost clock, core count, cache sizes, process node, memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, and includes integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX as the dominant processor for nearly all measured workloads. Its 20 cores, 30 MB L3 cache, 3 nm process, and 5.20 GHz boost clock produce an average benchmark score 64.4% higher than the i5-14490F. The 15 head-to-head wins include every heavy multi-threaded test and every PassMark throughput metric, with margins ranging from 15.1% to 69.5%.

The i5-14490F retains a specific niche. Its Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 3247 is 50.1% higher than the Ultra 7 255HX, and the two tie in Cinebench R15 singlecore. For applications that depend on a single high-frequency core and cannot utilize the Ultra 7 255HX's additional cores, the i5-14490F may deliver comparable or better results. Its DDR4 memory support also offers broader platform compatibility for existing desktop systems.

The Ultra 7 255HX, however, is the stronger overall choice based on the benchmark data. It wins the PassMark single thread test by 15.1%, so even in lightly threaded scenarios it often outperforms the i5-14490F. The only exception is the specific Cinebench R23 singlecore test. The Ultra 7 255HX also provides integrated graphics, a higher memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and an unlocked multiplier. The data shows a clear performance tier separation, with the Ultra 7 255HX ranking at the 93rd percentile globally versus the 86th percentile for the i5-14490F. Users who need maximum throughput across rendering, encryption, compression, or math-heavy workloads should select the Ultra 7 255HX. Users whose workloads specifically rely on the Cinebench R23 singlecore pattern may find the i5-14490F adequate, but the overall database evidence favors the Ultra 7 255HX.